Debate Heating Up On How to Lure Top-Notch Principals

Fears that the nation faces a shortage of principals are giving way
to deeper concerns about how best to improve the quality of school
administrators.

Foundations and education policy groups, in papers and roundtables
this spring, are arguing that while there are plenty of people who
could become administrators, few possess the skills or knowledge needed
to succeed at a time when expectations for student performance have
never been higher.

"Well- meaning educators often find themselves in charge of an
individual school, or as a school system CEO, with the required
credential, but without the appropriate training or experience to
successfully transform these complex organizations," Dan Katzir, the
managing director of the Los Angeles-based Broad Foundation, said at a
recent forum in Washington sponsored by the foundation.

In the past two weeks, the Wallace Foundation and the Thomas B.
Fordham Institute have weighed in with their own policy recommendations
for improving school leadership.

Emerging from the chorus is some agreement on what needs to be done.
Multi-pronged approaches that include better working conditions and
greater financial incentives, particularly to lure strong leaders to
weak schools, are in favor. Many analysts also say districts must play
a more active role in identifying and training potential
administrators.

But philosophical rifts also are beginning to open. Proponents of
deregulation, led by the Washington-based Fordham Institute, propose
that states strip down licensing rules for administrators to the bare
minimum to allow experienced leaders from other fields to work in
education. Other experts fear opening the floodgates to candidates who
lack an understanding of student learning.

And some observers doubt that leaders from outside education can
fare any better in schools than administrators with more traditional
backgrounds if nothing else changes about the job.

Richard Laine, the deputy director of education programs at the New
York City-based Wallace Foundation, formerly known as the Wallace
Funds, said: "We just think states need to be focused on creating the
environment for leaders to succeed."

Competing Prescriptions

Perhaps the greatest consensus is on whether there's a scarcity of
people eligible to serve as principals. Most experts now say there
isn't—a contention supported by three separate analyses sponsored
by Wallace.

One analysis, for example, found that the number of people in New
York state who are certified to become principals—and who also
are under age 45—is 50 percent greater than the number of
principalships in the state.

The surplus of credentialed candidates doesn't mean that districts
aren't finding it hard to fill such positions. Not everyone, for
instance, who holds a license to be an administrator wants to work as
one, especially in districts that give teachers a salary boost for
merely earning the credential. Likewise, not everyone with an
administrator's license is someone districts want to hire.

A Wallace-financed study that surveyed 70 superintendents across the
country found that nearly 40 percent agreed that getting qualified
principals was "a major problem."

For the Fordham Institute—an offshoot of the Thomas B. Fordham
Foundation—a crucial part of the solution is to cast a wider net
for potential administrators. With financial backing from the Broad
Foundation, which also supports coverage of leadership issues in
Education Week, Fordham has drafted what it terms a "manifesto"
calling on states to pare down licensing rules for principals.

"It seems to me there's a problem," said Chester E. Finn Jr., the
president of the Fordham Foundation. "We don't have enough good leaders
for schools, and we are only looking for them in the same places where
we have looked in the past."

By requiring only that a principal hold a bachelor's degree and pass
a background check and a basic test of school laws, states would free
districts to hire individuals who, though they may lack experience in
education, are proven managers, the manifesto argues.

Nearly all states require that administrators have prior work
experience in education—typically three to five years as a
teacher, according to a new survey of state policies conducted for the
Fordham Institute by C. Emily Feistritzer, the president of the
National Center for Education Information, a private research
organization based in Washington.

"There is no general move for bringing people from other careers, or
people who've held management positions in other occupations, into
school leadership positions," said Ms. Feistritzer, who also favors
programs that bring nontraditional candidates into teaching.

Supporters of deregulation say that the growing number of urban
superintendencies held by people from outside of education suggests
that leaders from other fields could be successful as principals.
Fordham's manifesto also argues for deregulating state licensure rules
for district leaders.

Fordham's approach sharply contrasts with efforts in recent years to
improve, rather than scrap, the credentialing process for principals.
Many states have sought to align their requirements for administrators
with the standards developed by the Interstate School Leaders Licensure
Consortium, or ISLLC. Drafted under the auspices of the Council of
Chief State School Officers and adopted in 1996, the standards stress
the importance of understanding both pedagogy and organizational
change.

A group of professional associations representing administrators
also has said it plans to launch a process of national certification to
recognize especially accomplished administrators. Proponents of
stronger credentialing procedures generally contend that knowledge of
teaching and learning should be a prerequisite for leading a
school.

"I think the person who can really do this job well, who has not
been a school teacher, is very few and far between," said Marc S.
Tucker, the president of the Washington-based National Center on
Education and the Economy, which completed its own study of the
principalship last year.

Despite the licensing debate, broad areas of accord over how to
improve school leadership are evident. Many experts say the financial
rewards for becoming a principal are lacking, particularly in schools
serving large concentrations of needy students.

'Job Redesign'

Wallace officials say states should introduce incentives to attract
high-caliber leaders to the schools facing the most challenges. Fordham
proposes that principals' base salaries be pegged at 50 percent above
what experienced teachers in their schools make.

Another common concern is that principals, although held accountable
for their schools' results, typically have little control over hiring,
instructional programs, and budgets. Many experts further argue that
the duties of principals have become too varied for one person to
handle.

"The first question is: Who would want this job?" Mr. Tucker said.
"And so it's partly a matter of job redesign, and partly rethinking
this business of aligning accountability and authority."

There's also little disagreement about the need to improve the way
school leaders are groomed for the job. Even many of those who favor
hiring leaders with education experience say the field can learn from
the corporate world, in which businesses often actively seek out people
with managerial potential and then put them through training programs
geared toward their needs.

Too often in education, Mr. Tucker noted, the pool of recruits is
"self-defined."

"They're people who decided they wanted to be school
administrators," he said, "and then presented themselves to schools of
education."

Vol. 22, Issue 39, Pages 1, 12

Published in Print: June 4, 2003, as Debate Heating Up On How to Lure Top-Notch Principals

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.